Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

President Bush is Pro-Life in Name Only
CHRISTIAN PATRIOTS FOR LIFE ^ | 1-16-05 | Kevin Jeanfreau

Posted on 01/16/2005 1:54:25 PM PST by cpforlife.org

A person is Pro-Life only to the degree to which they are willing to actually “do something about it”. I’ve been Pro-Life my entire life but until 7 or so years ago I did not do a thing about it. I still am not doing everything possible that I can do, but I am trying and getting better with time.

President Bush, whom I spent much time, effort, and resources for on both his bids for the White House is Pro-Life with such exceptions and compromises as to make the claim an insult to the 6 million babies that have been dismembered since he took office. Yes I believe President Bush is personally against abortion, but the actions he has taken thus far have saved very few, if any lives.

The president can, under his Constitutional authority refuse to enforce an unconstitutional opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court and all inferior federal courts. [1] “Pro-Life” Bush on any given day over the last 4 years could have broken the tyrannical holocaust of the Roe v Wade OPINION, which would then let the States' decide, as was the situation prior to Roe. 30 states have laws on the books banning or restricting abortion, and President Bush could have signed a piece of paper allowing those laws to be enforced. Since his party is in control of both houses of Congress there is virtually no chance that he would have been impeached let alone removed for such a brave and just act as this. If Bush were a true committed Pro-Lifer he would have used this authority, which has been used at least 3 times in history on FAR LESS SERIOUS MATTERS AS 4,000 murders a day every day for 32 years.

Bush signed The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2004. I’m sure he knew that other than the tremendous educational and public awareness impact (which is very good) the law was meaningless because all the serial killer abortionist had to do to stay “within the law” was give a lethal injection to the child prior to partial delivery and sucking his brains out.

President Bush has also had the opportunity for no less than two years to champion legislation that would have ended the holocaust precipitated by Roe [2]. His silence on this life saving legislation is at the same deafening level as everyone else, as only 2 or 3 Congressmen joined to co sponsor the different legislation, so I’m not singling Dubya out.

The only way the holocaust will end is with real and courageous leadership from Capitol Hill and the White House, from Pro-Lifers who are willing to do real battle for the babies, and for the Constitution.

President Bush is a hero on the war on terror, and I believe still can be a FAR GREATER hero, if he would do all that he can do to stop the murderous terror of American waiting to be born.

FOOTNOTES:

[1]Executive dissent with unconstitutional majority opinion

The President takes an oath of office Article 6, Clause 3 "to support this Constitution" and not the penumbras emanating from deviant dicta and unconstitutional opinion. The President can present his case of dissent to the public in a public address, executive orders, through members of his cabinet and through members of his party. He can act on his opinion, by not enforcing Roe v Wade and progeny against the States. States could legislate as they did prior to the 1973 unconstitutional opinion.

The following quote from Andrew Jackson is a concise statement of Constitutional principal that has been ignored, or forgotten for many decades. The prevailing myth seems to be that the Constitution is what the federal judiciary says it is, regardless of the extent of deviation from text or intent, and that all others who are bound by an oath of Office in Article 6, Clause 3 are forbidden to act on their understanding of the text they are sworn to uphold.

Article 6, Clause 3 contains no Oath or Affirmation to support any federal judicial opinion. The plain text of the Constitution reveals separation of powers, checks & balances and coordinate functioning of three branches that are not coequal in power. Power of impeachment, funding, regulation of lower federal court jurisdiction and the U.S. Supreme appelate jurisdiction resides in Congress. The President has the power of enforcement and isn't Constitutionally, legally, or ethically required to blindly enforce blatantly unconstitutional opinions. The Supreme Court has only the power of opinion, which has become far more biased in its increasing disregard of plain text than the mainstream media has been in its disregard of plain fact.

The Avalon Project : President Jackson's Veto Message Regarding ...

If the opinion of the Supreme Court covered the whole ground of this act, it ought not to control the coordinate authorities of this Government. The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must each for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it, and not as it is understood by others. It is as much the duty of the House of Representatives, of the Senate, and of the President to decide upon the constitutionality of any bill or resolution which may be presented to them for passage or approval as it is of the supreme judges when it may be brought before them for judicial decision. The opinion of the judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion of Congress has over the judges, and on that point the President is independent of both. The authority of the Supreme Court must not, therefore, be permitted to control the Congress or the Executive when acting in their legislative capacities, but to have only such influence as the force of their reasoning may deserve.

[2] We the People Act (HR 3893)- Prohibits the Supreme Court and each Federal court from adjudicating any claim or relying on judicial decisions involving: (1) State or local laws, regulations, or policies concerning the free exercise or establishment of religion; (2) the right of privacy, including issues of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or (3) the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation where based upon equal protection of the laws.

Pro-Life and Pro-Family groups and individuals must learn about this incredible piece of life saving legislation and call write fax e-mail their Representatives to demand that they co-sponsor and champion this legislation.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: bush04; cpforlife; hijackingissue; nutcases; plino; prolife
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 221-225 next last
To: sinkspur
"There is no stomach in either party for putting the country through a constitutional crisis,"

Sinkspur, BOTH parties HAVE allowed the country to suffer through the very CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS that is Roe v Wade.

I suspected that your point would be raised, but how few Pro-Life and Christian leaders ever cite the bloody fact that Roe v Wade is a far greater Constitutional crisis and the precedent that it set is a greater threat to the survival of the Republic than even Dred Scott.

We've butchered more children in our "Christian" nation than Hitler did in all Europe. We're IN a Constituional crisis and have been for 32 years, when will we open our eyes to see it?

But somehow that's not how you meant it.

101 posted on 01/16/2005 6:01:34 PM PST by cpforlife.org (The Missing Key of The Pro-Life Movement is at www.CpForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
Your arguments are valid, to me. But, the vast majority of Americans will simply not tolerate a President who defies the judicial branch of the United States.

To cut off one's nose to spite one's face is never smart.

102 posted on 01/16/2005 6:05:46 PM PST by sinkspur ("How dare you presume to tell God what He cannot do" God Himself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
We've butchered more children in our "Christian" nation than Hitler did in all Europe. We're IN a Constituional crisis and have been for 32 years,

He meant it in a "normalist" sense - that is, the current situation is not abnormal. when will we open our eyes to see it?

We'll open our collective eyes when we SHOW the world what an abortion really is. Most people have no clue and get sucked (no pun intended, honestly) into the blythe notion of personal freedom - "why would anyone be against choice? Of Course a woman should have a right to choose!" Choose what? Answering that question is our job.

Then we build even greater popular support and show through numbers that people want this unspeakable injustice righted, finally and irrevokably.

Understand that, in the process, some who will in the future share our convictions because of this work will not like us in the short term - because of their smitten consciences and because change itself is a process.

103 posted on 01/16/2005 6:09:54 PM PST by Lexinom (www.revotewa.com - Go DINO! www.illegitimategovernor.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas; sinkspur; Lexinom
"Sir, people like you are never satisfied.

There is only so much one president can do. We have a ban on partial birth abortions, which is more than Reagan did."

The ban is "unconstitutional" according to the rogue courts that Bush could correct. I never said he could end ALL abortions but he could make a tremendous difference beyond what he has. The article explains that SCOTUS is NOT Supreme over POTUS, he can check the courts but has not.

He said sometime back that the nation was not ready to overturn Roe--or words to that effect, and here is where truly great leadership is required. Act on what you know is right even if it costs you everything. I know Bush is a Christian and I suppose I am asking him to have a heroically virtuous level of self-sacrifice that Saints are made from.

It's NOT about "me" or "people like me" it's about the fact that the greatest nation in the history of the world has been thrust into a bloodthirsty CULTure of death. 4,000 babies will die tomorrow and very few people notice, most are quite fine with it all.

If it does not end with Bush, I suspect it never will. The second footnote in the article provides for much less dramatic corrective measures. It requires a simple majority in both houses and Presidential signature to become law. And so there is a "window" of opportunity for this to be passed. Bush has the opportunity to become a legend on par with Lincoln if he can champion this simple majority bill through.

I worked very hard to get him into office both times and I have every right to hold him accountable, as a Christian I have an obligation to hold him accountable.

104 posted on 01/16/2005 6:34:50 PM PST by cpforlife.org (The Missing Key of The Pro-Life Movement is at www.CpForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org

Fair enough.

Sorry for being such a jerk, I just hear people complaining all the time, and it gets old.


105 posted on 01/16/2005 6:48:21 PM PST by rwfromkansas ("War is an ugly thing, but...the decayed feeling...which thinks nothing worth war, is worse." -Mill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
they did act accordingly, ha ha, and didn't pull the thread and put in the bloggers section.

Appropriate public response. I have no idea whether they communicated further with the poster, but I hope they did.

I hope you notice that I did not call for a 'Zot!' on the poster -- just a correction of the practice of spamming on FR. I don't like spam any more here than I do in my e-mail -- do you?

I don't plan to do this often, but I will not tolerate spamming -- here or elsewhere.

106 posted on 01/16/2005 6:56:16 PM PST by TXnMA (Attention, ACLU: There is no constitutionally protected right to NOT be offended -- Shove It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA
just a correction of the practice of spamming on FR

spamming? websites, vanities and blogs are posted on the FR daily many times. Cpforlife can't show his work? are you for real? Hey, let's see your website.

In NJ we know how to take care of squealers.

we don't tolerate squealers and tattle tales.

here or elsewhere >>>

where else do you annoy people?
107 posted on 01/16/2005 7:12:39 PM PST by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
"The President is the one and only person, who can on his authority stay Roe v Wade."

Wrong, he can't.

108 posted on 01/16/2005 8:21:10 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
"Sinkspur, BOTH parties HAVE allowed the country to suffer through the very CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS that is Roe v Wade."

This is not a constitutional crisis, this is a moral crisis.

In a moral nation, legal abortion would not be an issue because moral people would not have abortions.

109 posted on 01/16/2005 8:23:19 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
"The president can, under his Constitutional authority refuse to enforce an unconstitutional opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court and all inferior federal courts."

Can you show me where in the US Constitution, the office of the President is given oversight over the findings of the Judicial branch of the government?

110 posted on 01/16/2005 8:28:30 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rommy

Have you ever stopped to actually contemplate what you advocate?... "That doesn't sound appealing? Then stop trying to force a bunch of women who are unwilling or unable to care for their children to have them." So, your solution is the protection of a speciously appointed right to serial killing, to relieve men and women from the responsibilities of their sexual activities? You have a typically democrat perspective on the issue of killing for the convenience of those who desire license. Sad really, that an apparently adult American is so blatant in support of serialized killing of alive human beings in order to achieve the 'enlightened society' of secularization. What is the human species coming to? Ghastly arrogance on your part, rommy, to advocate the wholesale killing and imply we of the pro-life crowd don't do anything for the babies born into this nation under less thanyour ideal conditions. [By the way, fool, you're being addressed by one who does do something about this tragedy and who has a little one living and blessing his home who would have been your candidate for extermination. You have rancid egg on your smarmy face.]


111 posted on 01/16/2005 8:40:00 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: tkathy

"No law will stop one single abortion. Anyone who wants one will always go where it is available." So immature of you ... sounds so very like the 'I want the right to any drugs and any behavior that pleases me' crowd. That which is deemed 'legal', as opposed to illegal, gains acceptance, even if it is deadly wrong as is the serial killing of alive unborn children. Congrats, you've extracted your metal from the rational discussion.



112 posted on 01/16/2005 8:43:02 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

Please, do explain.


113 posted on 01/16/2005 8:50:15 PM PST by cpforlife.org (The Missing Key of The Pro-Life Movement is at www.CpForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
The article did just that, but you have to read it.

Also try

THE IRREPRESSIBLE MYTH OF MARBURY
It's a PDF

114 posted on 01/16/2005 8:56:35 PM PST by cpforlife.org (The Missing Key of The Pro-Life Movement is at www.CpForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
I want you to show me where in the Constitution, the Executive branch gets oversight of the Judicial branch, and where the executive branch would get tge Constitutional power to determine the Constitutionality of the findings of the US Supreme Court.

I read the article and it doesn't include the answer.

115 posted on 01/16/2005 9:35:29 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama; A2J; Agitate; Alouette; Annie03; aposiopetic; attagirl; axel f; Balto_Boy; ...

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

116 posted on 01/16/2005 9:43:22 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (Women need abortion like a fish needs a bicycle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
"Nothing in the text of the Constitution supports a claim of judicial supremacy. The courts possess "[t]he judicial Power of the United States" and that power extends to "Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution," but nothing in the logic or language of such a statement of constitutionally authorized judicial jurisdiction implies judicial supremacy over the other branches of government. Jurisdiction to decide cases does not entail special guardianship over the Constitution. (If anyone could lay claim to the title of Special Trustee or Lord Protector of the Constitution, it would be the President, for whom the Constitution prescribes a unique oath that he will, "to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.")"

Judicial findings by the US Supreme Court come about as a result of cases brought before it, in which case, its findings are constitutionally grounded...the power of the Court lies in the fact that it grants the ultimate power to the people, by giving the people a place to challenge the constitutionality of laws.

The Executive branch has no judicial power, and while the President is charged with "protecting" the Constitution, that protection can't amount to dictatorial power over the people, and their Court system.

117 posted on 01/16/2005 9:44:49 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
President Bush is Pro-Life in Name Only

With all due respect, have you lost your bloody mind?

First, aren't you trying to have it both ways? You say the only thing that will end abortion is to adopt your educational reforms because the current electorate will never let go of Roe vs. Wade, then you expect the President to accomplsh what you say is impossible.

Second, check the list below--our enemies at PP compiled it, and they know Dubya's not fooling around. Reason number one that libs are so threatened by the President's faith is that they know what it means in the area of abortion, and they are scared witless.

REDUCING ACCESS TO FAMILY PLANNING

BUILDING THE PLATFORM TO OUTLAW ABORTION

REDEFINING THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE FETUS

PACKING THE COURTS TO OVERTURN ROEREPLACING SCIENCE WITH RIGHT-WING IDEOLOGYCENSORING FREE SPEECH
118 posted on 01/16/2005 9:53:41 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (Women need abortion like a fish needs a bicycle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback

Education, my FRiend. Show the world what an abortion is. Start in the most heavily pro-abortion parts of the country, where ignorance is highest. These are typically the same parts of the country lecturing us about free speech, now aren't they?


119 posted on 01/16/2005 10:28:37 PM PST by Lexinom (www.revotewa.com - Go DINO! www.illegitimategovernor.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

Comment #120 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 221-225 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson